Samandeep Kaur vs State Of Rajasthan
2022 Latest Caselaw 8314 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 3712/2022

1. Samandeep Kaur D/o Jaspal Singh W/o Mukesh Kumar, Aged About 26 Years, W.no. 5, Vill. Behar Wala Kalan, R Arw-A, Talwara Jheel, Hanumangarh, Raj. 335525.

2. Mukesh Kumar S/o Satyanarayan, Aged About 27 Years, W.no. 4, Behar Wala Kalan, 5 Arw-A, Hanumangarh, Raj. 335525.

----Petitioners Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

2. Sho, P.s. Talwada, Dist. Hanumangarh.

3. Superintendent Of Police, Hanumangarh, Dist.

Hanumangarh.

4. Jaspal Singh S/o Gurdev Singh, Aged About 45 Years, W.no. 5, Vill. Behar Wala Kalan, R Arw-A, Talwara Jheel, Hanumangarh, Raj. 335525.

5. Jagdeep Singh S/o Jaspal Singh, Aged About 23 Years, W.no. 5, Vill. Behar Wala Kalan, R Arw-A, Talwara Jheel, Hanumangarh, Raj. 335525.

6. Harpal Singh S/o Diyan Singh, Aged About 45 Years, W.no. 5, Vill. Behar Wala Kalan, R Arw-A, Talwara Jheel, Hanumangarh, Raj. 335525.

7. Harmel Singh S/o Lakhveer Singh, Aged About 38 Years, W.no. 5, Vill. Behar Wala Kalan, R Arw-A, Talwara Jheel, Hanumangarh, Raj. 335525.

8. Gurmel Singh S/o Lakhveer Singh, Aged About 42 Years, W.no. 5, Vill. Behar Wala Kalan, R Arw-A, Talwara Jheel, Hanumangarh, Raj. 335525.

9. Ikbal Singh S/o Gurdev Singh, Aged About 41 Years, W.no. 5, Vill. Behar Wala Kalan, R Arw-A, Talwara Jheel, Hanumangarh, Raj. 335525.

10. Joginder Singh S/o Harbans Singh, Aged About 38 Years, Satipura, Dist. Hanumangarh.

                                                                ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)        :     Mr. Manoj Kumar



                                      (2 of 3)                   [CRLMP-3712/2022]


For Respondent(s)        :     Mr. Mukhtiyar Khan, PP

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI

Order

27/06/2022

The instant misc. petition has been preferred by the

petitioners under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking direction for being

provided with adequate security and protection.

The petitioners both being major persons claim to have

performed a love marriage. They submit that the marriage was

performed against the wishes of their parents and thus, they feel

threat to their lives at the hands of respondent Nos.4 to 10, who

are family members and relatives of petitioner No.1. The

petitioners allegedly approached the Superintendent of Police,

Hanumangarh with a prayer to be provided with adequate

protection but no heed has been paid to their request so far.

The documents pertaining to the age of the petitioners

and the marriage ceremony performed between them have been

filed on record. Thus, taking cue from the judgment rendered by

the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Lata Singh Vs. State

of U.P. Reported in AIR 2006 SC 2522, the prayer made by

the petitioners for directing the S.P., Hanumangarh to provide

protection to the petitioners deserves to be accepted.

The Superintendent of Police, Hanumangarh shall have

the matter enquired into and if so required, appropriate protection

shall be provided to the petitioners as and when warranted. The

(3 of 3) [CRLMP-3712/2022]

S.P. Hanumangarh shall ensure that no harm is caused to the

petitioners, who have performed a love marriage.

It is hereby clarified that this order may not be

construed to be a validation of petitioners' marriage and proof of

their age. Any observation made herein shall not affect any

criminal or civil proceedings initiated against the petitioners, at

the instance of their relatives.

The misc. petition as well as stay petition accordingly

stand disposed of.

(VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI),J 78-Mamta/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)